12-05-14 02:07 PM
65 123
tools
  1. riss89's Avatar
    Stumbled on this article, and found it rather preposterous and in some ways amusing (although I won't pretend to be surprised) that BlackBerry's name was not mention even once. I fully understand the company's current position in the market and all that, but it still seems to reach a level of slight desperation and mild denial to attempt speaking on privacy, protection from NSA breaches, & phone encryption, yet not even acknowledge BlackBerry's existence... But perhaps I'm alone in getting that vibe? Does anyone else have any opinions on it

    How to stop NSA from snooping on you

    +-keystroke queen-+
    11-29-14 08:17 PM
  2. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    If you feel confident the NSA can't eavesdrop on you, you either are using a string and two cans, or are in ignorant denial. Does not mean they are, or have any interest in, but could. Period
    11-29-14 09:52 PM
  3. gogogadgets's Avatar
    If you feel confident the NSA can't eavesdrop on you, you either are using a string and two cans, or are in ignorant denial. Does not mean they are, or have any interest in, but could. Period
    Well, they're going to collect a large amount of data about you no matter what. A BlackBerry behind BES is pretty damn secure though. I think even the NSA would have a hard time stealing your nudies.

    But for the average BlackBerry out of the box, yeah, they're not going to have any problem.
    jojo beaconsfield likes this.
    11-29-14 10:11 PM
  4. BigBadWulf's Avatar
    Well, they're going to collect a large amount of data about you no matter what. A BlackBerry behind BES is pretty damn secure though. I think even the NSA would have a hard time stealing your nudies.

    But for the average BlackBerry out of the box, yeah, they're not going to have any problem.
    Work email through BES and BBM protected yes. Beyond that, good luck. Right or wrong, and G_d help this thread we start getting into that.
    TgeekB likes this.
    11-29-14 10:28 PM
  5. The Aficionado's Avatar
    If you use trust no one encryption they can't get your data any more than anyone else can. They can still grab lots of metadata, but they are ultimately working with the same tools available to any other hackers, though just with a bigger budget

    Posted via CB10
    11-29-14 10:43 PM
  6. Prem WatsApp's Avatar
    Anyone sure BlackBerry is totally immune against this?

    http://www.salon.com/2014/11/16/goog...ecurity_state/

    Very interesting read,
    even if only half of it were true... :-)

    ? ? ? Zzzzwipetyped from The Maskport - Zzzzmoqin'.... ? ? ?
    11-29-14 10:53 PM
  7. bakron1's Avatar
    I have said this a thousand times that anytime you are connected to the grid, you are vonerable to being hacked and/or having your personal data breached. Common sense and having good password management is the first step in insuring you data is safe.

    If you honestly think you are safe from government agencies looking at your data, you are dead wrong and should look at history. The Germans thought their codes where safe in WWII, but the British had cracked them a year earlier.

    Bottom line is that agencies like the NSA have the brightest minds and technology available to them that allows them to stay well ahead of any encryption technology available for typical consumer devices.

    Posted via my lovely passport on T Mobile USA
    11-30-14 05:05 AM
  8. jojo beaconsfield's Avatar
    Anyone sure BlackBerry is totally immune against this?

    Google?s secret NSA alliance: The terrifying deals between Silicon Valley and the security state - Salon.com

    Very interesting read,
    even if only half of it were true... :-)

    ? ? ? Zzzzwipetyped from The Maskport - Zzzzmoqin'.... ? ? ?
    I read the link ,it was quite long but well worth it,I came out thinking that BB is in the right business ,at the end it says..The potential market for Cyber Security Services is practically limitless,...luv that!!! Thanks
    Prem WatsApp likes this.
    11-30-14 05:54 AM
  9. jojo beaconsfield's Avatar
    Well at least they didn't bad mouth them like most USA media do,maybe they think ..if we ignore them they might go away...Big Bucks at stake and they want to keep it in the USA.
    riss89 likes this.
    11-30-14 06:07 AM
  10. TgeekB's Avatar
    Do we really have to go down this old road again? How has it proven useful?
    shaleem likes this.
    11-30-14 07:30 AM
  11. donnation's Avatar
    Work email through BES and BBM protected yes. Beyond that, good luck. Right or wrong, and G_d help this thread we start getting into that.
    Lolol
    BigBadWulf likes this.
    11-30-14 08:05 AM
  12. Superdupont 2_0's Avatar
    The title of this article is total $% and very misleading.

    The main problem is that smartphones are perfect tools for mass surveillance.
    Exporting these devices can undermine democracy and freedom in developing countries (and of course in western countries).

    Is think it is totally okay, if we start to re-think the encryption for consumer devices.
    There are pros and cons
    11-30-14 10:03 AM
  13. stevobbm's Avatar
    Stumbled on this article, and found it rather preposterous and in some ways amusing (although I won't pretend to be surprised) that BlackBerry's name was not mention even once. I fully understand the company's current position in the market and all that, but it still seems to reach a level of slight desperation and mild denial to attempt speaking on privacy, protection from NSA breaches, & phone encryption, yet not even acknowledge BlackBerry's existence... But perhaps I'm alone in getting that vibe? Does anyone else have any opinions on it

    How to stop NSA from snooping on you

    +-keystroke queen-+
    It is amazing that BlackBerry are totally ignored in this article. Think it's going to take a while for some of the media to acknowledge BlackBerry again.

    I hope I stayed on point here.

    ? Z10
    riss89 likes this.
    11-30-14 06:53 PM
  14. mornhavon's Avatar
    For those upset about the OP's article not mentioning BlackBerry: If you could make a fact-based point #6 about BlackBerry, what would it be? I don't think that most people reading the article are going to purchase BES licenses for themselves and everyone they want to communicate with.
    riss89 likes this.
    11-30-14 08:54 PM
  15. anon62607's Avatar
    If you feel confident the NSA can't eavesdrop on you, you either are using a string and two cans, or are in ignorant denial. Does not mean they are, or have any interest in, but could. Period
    And not just the NSA, but many major-nation intelligence agencies, if you become interesting enough for a specialized attack.

    You can take steps to avoid dragnet intelligence gathering, though and I think that is what most people focus on when they talk about electronic privacy. The NSA itself clearly believes communications security is possible against a determined state funded hostile agency, otherwise they wouldn't bother with their own cipher suites and comsec protocols and certifications, though.

    it's important to take a realistic approach to all of this, if you become interesting and important enough your communications have a high likelihood of being intercepted, even if you only communicate courier bin Laden style but if you are protecting yourself from bored NSA analyst or facebook or Google employee it becomes reasonable to think you can protect yourself.
    BigBadWulf, shaleem and BradZero like this.
    12-01-14 01:22 AM
  16. anon62607's Avatar
    If you honestly think you are safe from government agencies looking at your data, you are dead wrong and should look at history. The Germans thought their codes where safe in WWII, but the British had cracked them a year earlier.

    Bottom line is that agencies like the NSA have the brightest minds and technology available to them that allows them to stay well ahead of any encryption technology available for typical consumer devices.

    Posted via my lovely passport on T Mobile USA
    while the NSA is well funded and does indeed have a lot of very smart people working for them, they aren't magic. They can't brute force a 128 bit key any more than the rest of us can (800 billion times the age of the universe or 8 million times the age of the universe is still a very long time) and while it is likely their analytical attacks are somewhat advanced compared to the rest of the world it's still a pretty safe bet that 10 round AES is safe, for example.

    Well regarded strong ciphers are probably safe from any possible (NSA or not) brute force or analytical attack and I actually think that while it is one of the most interesting topics, cipher strength should be put to bed as a topic we have to generally worry about when talking about personal communications security.
    mnc76 likes this.
    12-01-14 01:39 AM
  17. blueberrymerry's Avatar
    They don't have to brute force any BB10-related encryption for data in transit, they just grab it unencrypted off the wire at data centers and cable landing points worldwide. Better yet, they just present Google/Microsoft/Apple with a National Security Letter to give up all data on you.

    If you really want proper security and not BlackBerry's half-baked smoke-and-mirrors stuff, you need strong encryption for data in transit, strong encryption for data at rest and obfuscated metadata so nobody knows who you're sending and receiving messages with.
    Troy Tiscareno likes this.
    12-01-14 11:56 AM
  18. anon62607's Avatar
    They don't have to brute force any BB10-related encryption for data in transit, they just grab it unencrypted off the wire at data centers and cable landing points worldwide. Better yet, they just present Google/Microsoft/Apple with a National Security Letter to give up all data on you.

    If you really want proper security and not BlackBerry's half-baked smoke-and-mirrors stuff, you need strong encryption for data in transit, strong encryption for data at rest and obfuscated metadata so nobody knows who you're sending and receiving messages with.
    Remember that there are several possible adversaries and not all of them have the ability to present a national security letter to anyone - if China wanted to eavesdrop on you or mass collect plaintext BlackBerry Messenger data, they'd have a more difficult time to do it legally than the NSA would. Their attacks would likely have to be against the endpoints or in the case of particularly hardened endpoints, against the encryption itself.

    I think this conversation is more specific to BES and BBM Protected, which are not vulnerable to national security letters insofar as plaintext doesn't exist outside of the endpoints, as it should be.
    mnc76 likes this.
    12-01-14 12:04 PM
  19. WolfangAukang's Avatar
    Pure Google/Apple progaganda, after leaking problems to keep buying their devices. Maybe it isn't a certified method, just done by instinct, but try to use the "hipster" method: Use not-so-common communication services when trying to send important information. Besides, do not keep important things on devices, backup them on a HDD and (for safety measures) encrypt it.
    12-01-14 12:11 PM
  20. offyoutoddle's Avatar
    it doesn't matter what technical steps you take to protect your hotmail or gmail though if the american's spooks just grab what they want from tech companies servers where it is all stored in the first place though does it? It takes a lot of paranoia and more importantly effort to defeat even that, such as pgp and never store an un encrypted message, but that relies on everyone you know doing the same. Very unlikely that that is the case i've found unfortunately. These are not good times.
    blueberrymerry likes this.
    12-01-14 01:10 PM
  21. shaleem's Avatar
    Here we go again
    TgeekB likes this.
    12-01-14 01:45 PM
  22. anon62607's Avatar
    Here we go again
    I'd much rather have endless debate about security than the situation we had a few years ago, in which everyone (wrongly) presumed they were completely secure if they were using BBM and in fact people shouted down at the mere suggestion that BBM was not completely secure (shouted down by people that don't know - literally - the first thing about cryptography).
    mornhavon and blueberrymerry like this.
    12-01-14 03:45 PM
  23. anon62607's Avatar
    it doesn't matter what technical steps you take to protect your hotmail or gmail though if the american's spooks just grab what they want from tech companies servers where it is all stored in the first place though does it? It takes a lot of paranoia and more importantly effort to defeat even that, such as pgp and never store an un encrypted message, but that relies on everyone you know doing the same. Very unlikely that that is the case i've found unfortunately. These are not good times.
    By the same token, security is possible. There are still intercepted World War II Enigma messages that have not been decrypted, for example.

    You are correct, I'd say, in that it is difficult to convince someone else to care as much about security as you do and if communication in a secure way takes any effort at all over the default insecure method they will fall back to the insecure method.

    Even to people for whom security is important who are aware of risks (I'd like to consider myself one) will fall back to a more convenient communication system after a time. Even with other crypto-crazy friends we tend to end up just chatting over Hangouts, knowing how easily those messages could be read by either google or anyone able to provide google a subpoena. We use hangouts because we can easily move the conversation back and forth between mobile device and desktop, android and ios.

    To really work, security has to be the default and be very easy to use, and imperfect as it is, this is why iMessage should get some credit, it is easy to use and it is the default.
    mnc76 likes this.
    12-01-14 03:52 PM
  24. riss89's Avatar
    Well at least they didn't bad mouth them like most USA media do,maybe they think ..if we ignore them they might go away...Big Bucks at stake and they want to keep it in the USA.
    True enough! I didn't think of it that way but that is a very good & valid point. There's been a lot of Blackberry-bashing over the years, so I guess it's a bit refreshing to see an absence of it even if it means the author altogether denies BlackBerry's existence lol

    +-keystroke queen-+
    12-01-14 06:53 PM
  25. riss89's Avatar
    It is amazing that BlackBerry are totally ignored in this article. Think it's going to take a while for some of the media to acknowledge BlackBerry again.

    I hope I stayed on point here.

    ? Z10
    Lol yes you most certainly stayed on point.. It kind of makes you wonder what BlackBerry will have to do to gain the reverence back that they once had... But like another individual pointed out, I suppose it is a small move out of a negative direction seeing as they didn't bash BlackBerry, they just simply and blatantly omitted acknowledging them lol

    +-keystroke queen-+
    12-01-14 06:58 PM
65 123

Similar Threads

  1. Dubsmash Blackberry 10?
    By deboykie in forum BlackBerry 10 Apps
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-02-15, 02:26 AM
  2. Classic without cellphone connection
    By mfurman in forum BlackBerry Classic
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-05-14, 09:45 AM
  3. Built for BlackBerry Apps, Standards?
    By Optimus4 in forum BlackBerry World
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-03-14, 03:21 AM
  4. Why can't I get notifications for snapchat on my blackberry?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-29-14, 05:09 PM
  5. Passport without cellular network (carrier)
    By mfurman in forum BlackBerry Passport
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-29-14, 04:36 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD